How do you like the five star rating? I personally hate it. It's just too vauge. When 1893: A World's Fair Mystery can get the same rating as Grim Fandango, your rating system is flawed. I would much rather like a ten scale rating. Anyone agree?

[Jackal]

I'll be curious to see this poll result, myself. But just for the record, the rating system has nothing to do with your example. They're vastly different games and scored highly for what they are. They could just as easily have been given identical 9/10 ratings, or 88% ratings, or whatever.

[AFGNCAAP]

Umm, effectively there is a ten-scale ratings, right? Thanks to the half-stars? And frankly, your example is not a proof of any kind. I could easily take two such games that the one I regard better got the same or lower note on the chosen site, whatever its scoring system may be. And I suspect you haven't played 1893 anyway.

[Wormsie]

Who trusts ratings anyway? The review itself is more useful

Yeah. Good point.

[EasilyConfused]

Indeed. Siskel & Ebert got along with just three rating categories--thumbs up, down, or sideways. The rating is a convenient rule of . . . uh, thumb . . . to indicate an overall impression, and the review itself lets the reader figure out if the game is likely to be to his or her taste. I think it's not broke and doesn't need fixing.

[RLacey]

I'm not a huge fan of any review scores (except as a rather pathetic developer, for whom scores are everything!).

However, since nobody is about to remove them altogether, and will give you plenty of reasons for them staying, I don't really have that much of a problem with the current 10-point system (half-stars, y'see).

[Stinger]

Originally Posted by SamNMax

How do you like the five star rating? I personally hate it. It's just too vauge. When 1893: A World's Fair Mystery can get the same rating as Grim Fandango, your rating system is flawed. I would much rather like a ten scale rating. Anyone agree?

Really. I would very much like to hear your critique of 1893.

[Jake]

I'd rather the reviews be run unscored, but I like having the stars there as a shorthand point of reference saying "is this game crap, kind of good, or really worth checking out" before I read the reviews. I can cruise for 3.5-5.0 star reviews of games that I otherwise wouldn't have been interested in.

Also given that AG includes half stars, it is a 10 point rating system. Unless you actually meant including one decimal point as well, in which case you were asking for a 100 point rating system.

Originally Posted by Stinger

Really. I would very much like to hear your critique of 1893.

I think it's a very interesting game, and I have respect for your review. But, and I'm sure many people would agree, It can't compare to Grim...

Sir.

Also given that AG includes half stars, it is a 10 point rating system. Unless you actually meant including one decimal point as well, in which case you were asking for a 100 point rating system.

Alright, alright. I'm talking out of my ass.

[bigjko]

Originally Posted by Jake

I'd rather the reviews be run unscored, but I like having the stars there as a shorthand point of reference saying "is this game crap, kind of good, or really worth checking out" before I read the reviews.

In light of that, I think a thumbs up - down - sideways type of system would be much more helpful, and less confusing.

[colpet]

The only usefullness of a rating system is where you are aware of the preferences of the reviewer. Otherwise, they don't mean much.
For example, I know what kind of games FGM likes, so her ratings would mean something to me. That is one of the virtues of hanging out at gaming forums - you get to know the tastes of the reviewers. Even relatively objective guidelines are grey areas.

[LauraMac]

even with the thumbs method - people would then stew over the length of the thumb - or - was it really to the side or just flexed funny and why couldn't you bend the thumb.

I realy like percentages the best - but think you have to stick with what people are familiar with and here it's stars.

[Stinger]

Originally Posted by SamNMax

I think it's a very interesting game, and I have respect for your review. But, and I'm sure many people would agree, It can't compare to Grim...

That sounds suspiciously like "I've never played it." But I'm just reading into things, as usual.

[100ja a.k.a. mr_mitja]

Who cares about the rating. Just read the review. Ratings are there for lazy people.

[VoodooFX]

Here are the steps I follow when reading reviews at our site:

1. read pros
2. read cons
3. read bottom line
4. read the review

the end

I always say that we have some very talented writers aboard, what score they give a certain game is their own view on the matter. By reading their review you get the picture what they liked, what they didn't, and why they gave it so and so many stars and why not half more or 2 less. I you like an aspect of a game that the writer didn't, like action sequences, timed puzzles, just to name the two, then you can adjust your personal score accordingly. Or better yet, write your own review and post it in Reader Reviews section of the forum... and you'll find out what others think of it.

I could live without a rating system altogether, like I've said once before, I don't care if it's in numbers, stars, apples or cheese bits(sorry Marek ). Rating system doesn't warrant a quality written review anyhow.

What I like on this site is that even a game with one or two stars gets the attention and a quality written review, no matter what the final score in the end is. Here you won't see a review containing 10 sentences why the game sucks, like in some other, non-free publications, *cough* *cough* PC GAMER *cough* *cough*

[Intrepid Homoludens]

I always say, going by score alone is for dabblers, but truly reading the review and formulating your own take on it is for pros.

[100ja a.k.a. mr_mitja]

Originally Posted by VoodooFX

cheese bits

But that could actually be better and more precise than the five star rating, look:

At least it's less confusing

[tabacco]

Originally Posted by 100ja a.k.a. mr_mitja

But that could actually be better and more precise than the five star rating, look:

At least it's less confusing

Nah, Marek'd never go for that

[Stinger]

Yeah, that could be a problem. Because when Marek loved a game, he'd give it zero cheese, and the more he hated it the more cheese bits he'd give it, and those of us who like cheese would reserve our cheese for the truly great games, and it could sort of get ugly.

And cheesy.